About a month or so ago I was on a treadmill at the gym when one of the televisions was playing old movies. I like a lot of those old b&w movies, and started reading the subtitles. I only got a few minutes into "Random Harvest" before I was finished with the workout, but it was enough to make me interested in reading the novel.

Charles Rainier was injured very badly during the first World War. He eventually recovered but without any memory of who he was before or where he had been for the last year or two. But after some sort of accident in Liverpool (he has no idea why he was there) he suddenly remembers his name and much of his pre-war life, and so heads home. Although he still can't remember anything since his injury, he sets about quietly building a new life. But, as the world teeters on the brink of a new world war, everything in this new life is threatened when his memories finally return.

Charles’s return had somehow disturbed their equilibrium, for if there is one thing more mentally upsetting to a family than death, it must be (on account of its rarity) resurrection.

This is a very slow-building story, so slow that I was losing interest and ready to put it aside. But I looked again at the reviews here, and seeing how highly others regard the book, I kept at it. Thank heavens I did! The tension picks up considerably near the end. I kept looking at the pages dwindling and wondering how it could possibly be resolved. And as I read the last words of the book, I couldn't help but exclaim aloud: "Woah, I didn't see that coming!" (Which is the best way to experience this ending, in my opinion.)

The ending was great even if it's a bit melodramatic, but even before that I'd begun to be charmed by the writing. It's interesting to see the little slice of life in pre-WW2 England, and it kind of reminded me of Far From the Madding Crowd in its depictions of the people. In spite of a slow start, this was a great read. I can't wait to watch the old movie version now.

I saw the movie with Ronald Colman and Greer Garson some time ago, but just decided to read the book. The movie is not nearly as detailed in what happens to Charles in the various stages of his life as the book is. You really begin to see what kind of a man he is, especially considering the ordeals he has undergone. The movie concentrates much more on the Greer Garson character. In the book she is more 'elusive' in some ways. Paula is still a performer, but you are offered more of a red herring as to to her ultimate character. In the movie you know what she knows, but not in the book. Obviously, Hilton did this for a good reason.

There are many other characters, which touch on Charles's life, including some very selfish relatives. It's a troubling time in the post-Great War period, and Hilton does a fine job in showing how it affects the rich and the not-so-rich. I would recommend both reading the book and seeing the movie.

A novel about a man who wakes up one day in 1919 and finds he can’t remember anything about the last three years of his life. 1941.

Full review (and other recommendations!) at Another look book

This book delighted me so much, it will probably be one of my favorite reads of 2014. I loved how it was all jumbled out of order, with the mystery of the story--what happened during those forgotten three years?--established from the very beginning. The 1942 movie adaptation puts rather more emphasis on the romance aspect of the story, but I wouldn't really call the book a "romance." To me, it's more about a man being haunted by deja vu, and the process by which he remembers what he's forgotten. For its jumbled-memory aspect and war-time undertones, it actually reminded me of The World in the Evening. Both are very well-crafted books.

The narrator, a young man called Harrison, is Secretary to Charles Ranier,a successful businessman and member of Parliament. Ranier seems to have everything, but he is haunted by a mysterious episode in his past. Badly wounded in WW1, he went missing for two years, and suddenly woke up in Liverpool one day without having the slightest idea of what he was doing there or what happened during those missing two years. He tells Harrison the story of his life after he came back from being missing, his problems with his relatives, not all of whom are delighted by his return etc. He married at some point, but his wife, a successful and attractive hostess, remains an enigmatic figure. Will he ever discover where he was and what he was doing during those two years? This was a fairly interesting story, but the ending is most unsatisfactory, it leaves unanswered several things I wanted to know, and in particular I would have liked to know a lot more about Mrs Ranier.

I recently watched a TV adaptation of 'Goodbye Mr Chips'. I'd enjoyed the Robert Donat/Greer Garson vehicle as a boy but disliked the Peter O'Toole/Petula Clark rendition. The TV series was excellent, and recalling also 'Lost Horizon' it seemed that Hilton's books made good movies so I tracked down 'Random Harvest'. I shouldn't have bothered.

The basic plot premise is flimsy - more suited to a short-story or after-dinner anecdote - and the 'twist' is foreshadowed early on to any perceptive reader. Hilton's attempt to merge the protagonist's amnesia with England's apparent inability to remember the First War on the brink of the Second results in rambling long-winded analysis of socio-economic changes. Characters are unconvincing and unsympathetic, plot points and the first-person narrator are contrived, and some attempts at rendering vernacular speech are cringe-inducing.

Wonderful. And, oh my, the ending . . .

While I could never part with the film version of RANDOM HARVEST (1942)—it's been a long-time fave—I love the book *even more*. And it's due to my love of the film and listening to Robert Osborne all those watches over time through those years that encouraged me to read the novel by James Hilton, which, whether or not you've seen the film or whether you love the film or not, I consider the book a must-read.

I even revisited the film in 2023 and it reminded me of a blog I wrote on my love for the book during the TCM Union days for classic film fans, and I decided to post it as a CINEMA COFFEE write-up that had been in my drafts, so, instead ... Tea Time for a Coffee Break: https://shorturl.at/kmET6

Harrison, our narrator, meets an enigmatic stranger on a train in the 1930s. In due course he finds that the fellow, Charles Rainer, is a successful industrialist and an MP, and also that following a trauma in World War I Rainier has lost all memory of a couple of years of his life.

We learn about Rainier's life since then, and eventually we learn what happened in the blank years. Rainier has lived two very different lives, and the discovery has powerful ramifications.

What is the more impressive is that Hilton more or less explicitly uses these divergent ways to live as metaphors for Britain's future: where conviction and passion were called for, he suggests, the nation settled instead for good management and the minimum of fuss. Rainier is a microcosm for national destiny, and all this occurs as World War II looms, making the chosen path a vital rather than abstract matter.

There are layers and ingenuities here that would take pages to list. I read the closing pages with the thrilled admiration of watching a master craftsman at work. Pieces slotted into place as gently and precisely as in a Tetris demo mode, with the last moments forcing the reader to rewind and re-evaluate the whole book. A fascinating and challenging novel.

Enjoyable read. But, I think, somewhat different from the movie. Both are excellent.

This book kept getting lost on my Kindle. Can't think of any other reason that it took me 7 years to read it.

This book is such a comfort read. I loved it-4.5 stars!

My admiration for the 1942 movie adaptation starring Ronald Colman and Greer Garson is what led me to read this book. The biggest difference between the two is that they are structured differently. The movie plays out in chronological order while the book does not. I enjoyed the book overall but for some reason I felt like it ended abruptly. I'm not sure if I will read it again since I would probably choose the movie over the book.

4.5 stars!

First, let me say how much I dislike the cover art that GR shows for this novel. Wrong, wrong, wrong.

That said, if you haven't seen the film, starring the wonderful Greer Garson, PLEASE don't watch it or read any reviews or synopses until you've read the book. The novel is actually a mystery (involving a shell-shocked amnesia patient, not the usual murder), and the revelation doesn't come until the last page. The movie necessarily shuffles things around and that revelation comes at the beginning, then flashes back to see how it all came about. Those who have seen the film will still enjoy the book, but I reckon it would be even better for readers to have the fun of the discovery.

I love Hilton's gentle, English style. Whether or not his depiction of English people, places, history, and culture is current - or ever really was - it's every Anglophile's dream of what England is all about. That style, coupled with an intriguing tale set between the two World Wars is a winning combination. Published long before VE Day, Hilton's grasp of the sentiment of those times seems fresh and insightful. A wonderful novel, and I can't wait for my next James Hilton book.